Author Topic: the 2 party system doesn't work [change my mind]  (Read 1290 times)

okay so a mockery of our house and senate voting is better?

democrat wins house vote for having more seats

republican wins senate vote for having more seats

neither votes are bipartisan


nothing gets solved


meanwhile if they want to remove all our guns they could all loving agree to it by tomorrow
i completely see what you're saying but in countries where votes = seats, noting gets done either cause everyone's too busy arguing as far left and far right parties and centrists of differing viewpoints are then added to the mix rather than them having to follow the herd if they were in a big-tent two party system. bipartisanship is extremely hard to achieve unless you live in a politically 'boring' country like the UK in 2005 or scandanavia

I don't consider it a democracy if you can win a vote based on the amount of seats you have.

So if republicans have 200 seats and democrats have 190 seats

Theoretically since republicans (all 200 of them) could unanimously vote for either yes/no they'll win each vote 100% of the time, doesn't matter what democrats vote for.

And vice versa


What kind of backwards voting process is this? Both parties should have equal number of seats so this doesn't happen. Even then it's still possible for them to rig the system by having a democrat vote in favor of republicans or vice versa.

I don't consider it a democracy if you can win a vote based on the amount of seats you have.
if the seats are fairly distributed in proportion to a popular vote then it is completely a democracy.


So if republicans have 200 seats and democrats have 190 seats

Theoretically since republicans (all 200 of them) could unanimously vote for either yes/no they'll win each vote 100% of the time, doesn't matter what democrats vote for.
basically yeah, which is why a seats system doesn't work with a two party system. same thing goes for elections. there's one constituency in the UK that won a conservative seat by a majority of 7 votes so that seat is completely polarised in theory but belongs to one party. seats are good if there's more than two parties

What kind of backwards voting process is this? Both parties should have equal number of seats so this doesn't happen.
that's such a stupid idea. if the democrats get 59,999,999 votes and the republicans get 1 they should still have the same amount of senators and congressmen? that would be rigged af cause i swear if congress is in a deadlock then the speaker of the house gets to decide or something like that. besides it would cancel itself out as it would be impossible to reach a supermajority with 50/50 lol

add 3 parties in then.

Because right now there is only 1 for independent and that 1 vote doesn't matter, like at all

If you remove guns, you remove murder, and by removing murder, you remove crimes, and by removing crimes, you achieve world peace



This has to be sarcasm.


Just make murder illegal then


forget the repub and dem party. bring back the bull moose party



bull moose chads rise up

pretty sure this is literally the only time I've ever agreed with something lord tony has said
when you have two parties with completely opposite views always switching off leadership no progress is made
plus two candidates means that the real people who pull the strings only need to vet two candidates

plus two candidates means that the real people who pull the strings only need to vet two candidates

Which is how the DNC rigged it so Bernie would lose to Hillary
« Last Edit: January 11, 2020, 02:33:55 AM by King Tøny »



Bernie's gonna single-handedly put an end to this war before it can begin